Mrs.C.Aarthi @ Priyadharshini v. R.Arun

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.03.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI 1.C.Aarthi @ Priyadharshini W/o.Arun 2.Siddharth (Minor) Represented by mother and natural guardian C.Aarthi @ Priyadharshini ... Appellants Vs.

R.Arun S/o.J.Ravi Kumar .. Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, praying to set aside the order and decreetal order dated 14.12.2022 passed in F.C.I.A.No.4 of 2022 in F.C.O.P.No.347 of 2021 and thus allow the present CMA.

For Appellants :

Ms.E.Ezhil Caroline Page Nos.1/5

For Respondent :

Mr.S.Prem Raj Kumar

J U D G M E N T

[Judgment of the Court was made by K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.,] Captioned 'Civil Miscellaneous Appeal' [hereinafter 'CMA' for the sake of brevity] has been filed assailing an 'order of pendente lite maintenance/interim maintenance order' [hereinafter 'impugned order' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity] made under Section 24 of 'The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [25 of 1955]' {hereinafter 'HM Act' for the sake of brevity}.

2. This Court vide a detailed common judgment/order dated 21.03.2024 in S.Menaka v. K.S.K.Nepolian Socraties and other cases Court} and 2024 Live Law (Mad) 126 inter alia held that appeals against pendente lite maintenance/interim maintenance orders under Section 24 of HM Act are not maintainable but a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India would lie and preserved the rights of the appellants for Page Nos.2/5

preferring revision while giving closure to such CMAs.

3. In the aforementioned scenario, without dilating further on maintainability, suffice to say that captioned CMA will also be governed by S.Menaka v. K.S.K.Nepolian Socraties and other cases {Batch} reported in 2024:MHC:1405 and 2024 Live Law (Mad) 126 i.e., there would be closure and preservation of rights as in S.Menaka v. K.S.K.Nepolian Socraties and other cases {Batch} reported in 2024:MHC:1405 and 2024 Live Law (Mad) 126.

4. Ergo, the sequitur is captioned CMA is disposed of as not maintainable/closed albeit with preservation of rights in the aforementioned manner i.e., as in Menaka Principle.

5. Though obvious, it is made clear that in this order, this Court has not expressed any view or opinion on merits qua captioned CMA.

6. If learned counsel on record for appellants in the captioned CMA Page Nos.3/5

requests for return of certified copy qua impugned order, the same shall be returned forthwith to learned counsel on record for the appellants under due acknowledgment.

7. There shall be no order as to costs.

(M.S.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 27.03.2024 Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking mk P.S. I: Upload forthwith P.S.II : All concerned including the Registry of Madras High Court to act forthwith on the uploaded soft copy of this proceedings as uploaded in the official website of this Court. To be noted, the soft copies uploaded in the official website of this Court are water marked, besides being QR Coded. To 1.

The Judge, Family Court, Chengalpet.

2.

The Section Officer V.R. Section High Court, Madras.

3.

The Section Officer E.R. Section High Court, Madras.

Page Nos.4/5

M.SUNDAR, J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., mk 27.03.2024 Page Nos.5/5